Hate + Ignorance = Fitz

You may recall that Arizona Daily Star Cartoonist spewed this comment that is an example of hatred combined with ignorance.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a loutish embarrassment to respectable law enforcement, who rounded up humans like French Jews....

I say that this is a combination of hatred and ignorance because Fitz is comparing Joe Arpaio to Adolf Hitler and in doing so, he's blaming Arpaio for a policy of the Obama Administration. (You can be forgiven for not knowing the extent of President Obama's mass deportation because it gets very little coverage in the American, English based mainstream media. However his policy gets extensive coverage in both domestic Spanish media and internationally. Here's a great example from this week's Economist called "Barack Obama, deporter-in-chief.")

So Arpaio is like Hitler because the Obama Administration is engaging in mass deportations.

Hannity’s home has been listed for $3.6 million, his listing agent told Newsday. That doesn’t include the slave quarters.

Sure, Conservative's are naturally slave holders. In fact, the logical extension of the less government position is, of course...slavery.

Once again, Fitz' outrageous hatred is combined with shocking ignorance. After all, the "One Party South" existed from the period of slavery all the way through 100 years of Jim Crow. What party do you think that was? I'll give you a hint. It wasn't the Republican or Libertarian Parties.

Post Script:

The Star has kicked former Publisher John Humenik up the chain of command and Bobbie Jo Buel is serving as interim Publisher. Maybe this is an opportunity for grown up supervision to prevail. Wouldn't it be great if Buel would tell Fitz that if he wants to compare people to Hitler and call them slave owners that he should do it on his own time. Yeah right. I slay me.

GP: You're giving Fitz way too much credit for, well, anything. So few people even know of his existence that your blogging of him probably quadrupled his readership.
Fitz is a leftist bigot who is part of the reason the Arizona Red Star is history. But at least we can thank him for that.

The problem with the Right's oft repeated claim that Democrats controlled the slavery and Jim Crow south is those Democrats are now Republicans. The Republican Party's "southern strategy" was a direct appeal to the baser instincts of southern Democrats and it was hugely successful. So yes, the slave holders and Jim Crow enablers were Democrats. The proud inheritors of their legacy is the modern Republican party.

And President Obama's deportation policy gets lots of coverage in the mainstream media. If people are uninformed about the President's deportation policy it's because 1) they choose to ignore it or 2) they watch FOX, which only talks about immigration from the White Right perspective and the President's deportations don't fit that narrative.

Peter,
That's among the most absurd pieces of revisionist history I've ever heard.

The South today has African-American elected officials, business owners, journalists, medical and legal professionals, and so on, and so on....

The oppressive, racist, and inhuman treatment of African Americans under the imprimatur of the laws, mores and social structure of the South has been dead and buried for decades. Yes, there are ignorant bigots in this world and they will always be with us, but that's a human failing, not exlusive to any political party.

How 'bout we treat each other as people and try, just try, to put aside all labels... It would do Republicans, Democrats, and people of all ethnic backgrounds a lot of good.

"What party do you think that was? I'll give you a hint. It wasn't the Republican or Libertarian Parties."

Looks like you're confusing party affiliation with conservative/progressive ideals.

I would do that too, if my party gave shelter to people like Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms. I'd do as much possible to distract that issue, because otherwise, I'd have to acknowledge history didn't end in 1964.

Yeah, a stain on his past if ever there was one but of course, like I said, history did not end in 1964.

So, while the Democratic Party has had a shameful past in relation to slavery (except, of course, for those courageous Democrats who left the party to form the Free Soil party - but again, I'm not conflating the progressive ideal to a party lable), the Democratic Party's history post-60s has been to keep the flame that the pre-1964/68 Republicans started lit.

People like Strom Thurmond left the Democratic Party and joined the GOP. Why? And why did the GOP welcome them in with open arms?

These are hard, painful questions I'm afraid you're not willing to confront, Doug.

“When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over the years, either” - Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS), 2002

Revisionist would be to suggest that the federal debt is as bad as slavery (a claim made by Sarah Palin, although that might just be ridiculous hyperbole) or that family life during slavery was a good thing (a claim made by Michele Bachmann).

It is not revisionist to suggest that today's GOP is the inheritor of the southern Democrats racial exclusion policies. Exhibit 1 is the number of Southern Democrats who fled the party in the 1950s and 1960s when the party finally embraced civil rights. They were welcomed into the big tent of the Republicans. That's not revisionism.

Civility has nothing to do with senseless attack on Giffords (calling it an "incident" does a terrible disservice to Giffords and the people murdered by the madman).

It has to do with not throwing around names like "libtard" or, yes, equating Arpaio with Hitler." Civility is something that should make our society better and the erosion of civility is certainly hurting our society. So relish your name calling, it cheapens us all.